World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Oh there are, may I see the contemporary historical records please?
You're gonna have to explain what contemporary means.
At the time. Not a 90 year later hearsay account that goes through a 1000 years of monks "correcting" it.
Here.
Hmm not seeing any contemporary records in the Wikipedia article, which I am sure you read, why don't you list specifically what record you are referring to?
I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make it drink.
The sources that do exist were shortly after Jesus' life, and they were not only consistent with each other, but from radically different sources, including Roman, Jewish, Christian, and even Muslim sources. It's pretty simple to check the sources against one another and see what lines up.
Scholars generally agree that someone named Jesus of Nazareth existed in Palestine in the 1st century AD. Is Jesus the Son of God? Depends on who you ask, but to say that he didn't exist at all is being willfully ignorant.
Instead of a lecture about why I should accept you on faith why not produce the contemporary records?
Oh like Paul who didn't see anything? Oh like the Mark Gospel written fifty years later, with no sources, on a different continent filled up with copy and pasted from Elijah? Oh you mean like Josephus (50 years after the supposed events) with two passages one a forgery and the other possibly talking about someone else? Oh you mean Tacticus who was a century later and related hearsay without consulting a single Roman record?
How about everyone else, how about the hundreds of letters we have from that area and time period that never once mention any of the events? How about people documenting Messiah figures during the first century not seeing anyone? How about the total lack of records of Nazareth even existing in that century, the entire Joseph family missing from records, all relics missing, the tomb missing, the trial records missing?
Now show me a CONTEMPORARY record not what some Muslim said in Saudi Arabia 9 centuries later.
I did. It seems your definition of "contemporary" is different from mine.
Whatever. No point in arguing with the atheist circlejerk; it's sad how the good points you have get ruined by your inability to do research and understand context.
Nope. Contemporary is not 90 years later by any definition. Me writing an article this week about fashion trends of 1923 should not be titled "contemporary fall fashion".
So not contemporary to Jesus?
"Contemporary" is the period of time where there would be people living who had experienced these events, even if the historian him/herself hadn't lived to see them.
So...yes, still contemporary.
But the people supposedly writing about him were not Jesus' contemporaries. They would not have met him, or seen him, they were writing on behalf of what they say other people claim.
That is when they even did that much. The writers of the Gospels liked to alter the text to "improve" it. Luke and Matthew, for example, took out a sentence where Jesus gets a bit angry and yells.
Gotcha since the oldest living person right now was born in 1907 that means that everything from March 3rd, 1907 and back is ancient while everything after that date gets squished together ad contemporary.
I am a contemporary of Gandhi, Mao, Dr. King, FDR, Stalin, Churchill, Reagan, Armstrong, Cumae, the Lindenberg baby, Thomss Edison, Einstein, and Aldrin.
I like how useless this definition you invented for yourself to "win" an internet argument is. Now if you excuse me I just got a notice of an important telegram, it seems that Kaiser is up to his old tricks again and if I don't help us land a man on the moon the Frye Festival will be a complete disaster. Here is a bitcoin for your trouble, you can use it to buy a piece of mutton with some New Coke.
What a dimwit.
Jesus is an indisputed historical figure.
I'm not sure how to break this to you... The first written record of Jesus doesn't appear until some 70 years after the date of his crucifixion. That's in the writings of Josephus, but the problem with Josephus is that the copy that survived is from the 4th century, which appears to have been edited by Eusebius, a Christian, inserting the mention of Jesus. Quotations of Josephus prior to Eusebius make no mention of Jesus. Good reading here:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43723559
We know people like Pontius Pilate existed because we have documents from the era talking to and about him. There's nothing remotely similar for Jesus.
I describe it like this, the story goes that Jesus was an amazing figure, speaking to the masses at the sermon on the mount, raising the dead, etc. Why is there no written record of him at the time? No letter from one person to another going "Hey, I just saw this Jesus guy and he's making a lot of sense!" No Roman records for arrest, trial or execution? And man, those Romans loved their documents.
A modern day equivalent would be having no written record of Elvis until some 70 years after he died, and the only surviving copy of that 70 year document being from another transcriber 400 years after he died. We would still be 24 years away from the first written record of Elvis.
It's amazing how a first century Jewish person would be expressing an idea of the Trinity that wouldn't come around for another two centuries and that of all his writings he only changed topics like this a single time. Also that people familiar with Christianity and his works just never mention this for 200-300 years.
Imagine a super popular book written in 1723 and only last week someone mentioned what might be the single most important passage. Incredible.
Yup. Part of the problem is that people still think the Gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John when we know, factually, they weren't.
I am disputing him. Would you care to provide evidence for your claim or personally attack me again?